Realistic shooters... what's the appeal?

[Annoying]

I can't stand aiming with a controller.

Besides that, this is the age old debate of twitch gaming versus strategic gaming. Twitch gaming is about aiming skill and strategic gaming is about flanking, flashbanging, and smoking.

[Maxie]

Personally I really prefer BF2/BC2 over games like Halo and CoD. Now, while teamwork of course plays a role in those games as well, the class synergy in the Battlefield games really promotes teamwork :P

[kailtas]

I am not even slightly interested in trying a Console.

Thus i play SC2 and LOL. With the occasional 20-2 rounds on MW2 because its so god damn easy.

[Laughriot]

I agree with ToccsI don't see why you seem to consider tracking and getting 4 headshot with a DMR to be skill but getting one in CoD or CS to be luck. There have been plenty of times in Black Ops where someone got the drop on me and I came out alive, and there have been plenty of times in Reach where I've come around a corner into someone sitting with a shotgun and could do nothing.

You don't understand why I consider doing something four times in a row to be skill, and doing the same thing once to not be skill? I don't mean to come across as sarcastic, but... seriously? I honestly don't understand where you are coming from with that at all. I didn't say that all headshots in CoD were luck, that would be a ridiculous statement. But demonstrating the ability to do something repeatedly in a row does seem to be more skillful in nature than performing that same activity one time and then stopping.

Pick any RL example you want. I'll arbitrarily choose... I dunno, weightlifting. I might be able to bench press a significant amount of weight once. Clearly doing that means I'm a better weight lifter than the guy who can sit down and lift that amount of weight four or five times in a row, am I right? I can hit a free throw in basketball once. Am I as skillful as the guy who can hit the free throw 4-5 times? (Probably a bad example, since I can actually hit that free throw closer to eight or nine times out of ten. The goal doesn't really move, ya know... still...)

The point was very little to do with head shots to start with. It was the fact that if two people who both know how to point their screens at each other and shoot are playing a game of Black Ops, every encounter between them (assuming no colossal derp moments) will end with 2-3 trigger squeezes at best. Why? Because if you can hit someone center mass two or three times on Black Ops, they are dead. It is more of a test of reflexes than a test of aim.

That same encounter on Halo would hinge much more strongly on which one of them could track the other person and repeatedly hit a vital area over the course of a few seconds. The person who gets the drop doesn't automatically win, as they often do in Black Ops.

In conclusion, a person who scores a headshot on Black Ops is rewarded with an instant kill, regardless of whether or not the headshot was luck. A person who scores a headshot on a Halo game (with anything short of a sniper rifle, which is a much more difficult to use weapon) has to perform that same action several more times, and demonstrate either the ability (re: skill) to do so whenever he pleases, or a MUCH MUCH higher degree of luck.

ugh, I just basically restated my entire perspective, just to respond to a statement that doesn't make any sense. I probably should have just let it pass.

TL;DR: Me responding to someone that doesn't understand why doing something once doesn't demonstrate possession of a skill, while doing something multiple times on command does.

[Shandrislock]

C.O.D. is far from a realistic shooter. Play one of the battlefield games and you'll see how badass games like that can become!

[Korao]

First of all, you tried CoD, which is a really poor example, because there is no realism in that game. CoD is an Arcade-FPS game, not a realistic one(Not saying it's bad). A realistic FPS would be the Battlefield series, but your question is still there, what is the appeal? In a game like Battlefield, simulating the real war, maybe the fact of "maintaining aim on a moving target" is not as much like Halo, but it still need skills. And something important in Battlefield is teamwork and strategy to succeed the goals.

Something else would be the "feeling". I'm a huge "war-lover", not that I love countries going to war, but I love the actual "act of war". So what? I love war movies(Saving Private Ryan, Black Hawk Down, We Were Soldiers, Band of Brothers...), but I still don't have the actual feeling of BEING in the action. So yeah I play Paintball often, but this is still not the same thing. So the only remaining option I have would be joining the army(I'm actually wanting to join the army), but there is the danger of getting kill and in real life there is no respawn like in games. So FPS games with a huge realistic factor bring me the feeling I search, without the danger of actual war.

You can also say something similar with realistic car games (Forza & Gran Turismo comes in mind), why playing theses games when you can do it in real life? Well I play Forza because it brings me the option to have the car I want, the way I want and do whatever I want with it, without the need of actually paying for all that.

[Laughriot]

First of all, you tried CoD, which is a really poor example, because there is no realism in that game. CoD is an Arcade-FPS game, not a realistic one(Not saying it's bad). A realistic FPS would be the Battlefield series, but your question is still there, what is the appeal? In a game like Battlefield, simulating the real war, maybe the fact of "maintaining aim on a moving target" is not as much like Halo, but it still need skills. And something important in Battlefield is teamwork and strategy to succeed the goals.

Something else would be the "feeling". I'm a huge "war-lover", not that I love countries going to war, but I love the actual "act of war". So what? I love war movies(Saving Private Ryan, Black Hawk Down, We Were Soldiers, Band of Brothers...), but I still don't have the actual feeling of BEING in the action. So yeah I play Paintball often, but this is still not the same thing. So the only remaining option I have would be joining the army(I'm actually wanting to join the army), but there is the danger of getting kill and in real life there is no respawn like in games. So FPS games with a huge realistic factor bring me the feeling I search, without the danger of actual war.

You can also say something similar with realistic car games (Forza & Gran Turismo comes in mind), why playing theses games when you can do it in real life? Well I play Forza because it brings me the option to have the car I want, the way I want and do whatever I want with it, without the need of actually paying for all that.

To you and the poster above you: /sigh, is it possible to edit the title of a post? I've never tried. I wasn't trying to say that CoD is an insanely realistic video game. I only meant that it was a video game where the style and gameplay were designed to give the feeling of realism. Instead of having a HUD, you have a gun barrel to aim down. Instead of having pewpew laser guns, you have real weapons from a specific time period. Instead of having to shoot your opponent (who happens to be an 8-foot alien killing machine with an energy sword) 10 times in the chest to drop him, your opponent drops with a bare handful of center mass shots, or one head shot.

I am not trying to debate as to whether or not the game is actually realistic. I only meant that it falls into the genre of "realistic shooters" because it sacrifices quality-of-life things in favor of a higher degree of "realism."

That being said, thank you for the reply. It was well stated, and made a lot of sense. I can understand seeking a video game that helps you satisfy a RL desire without presenting the same danger as RL. I would likely enjoy that type of game more, if I was a combat enthusiast. As it stands though, I am... well, a video game enthusiast. I care a lot less about realism in games than I do about even playing fields and balance. As such, I enjoy games where having someone get the first shot off on me isn't a near-automatic death sentence.

[Deleted]

I'm sorry?

COD realistic? are you motherfucking kidding me? COD, battlefield, whatever, is just about so far from realism as Halo is.
Im an ex Danish Quick reaction force soldier, and i have never in my career experienced, or heard of anyone experience anything remotely like, what COD and the other games are showing.

I am truly saddened that some people catagorize COD etc. as "realistic shooters" when they are so god damn far from reality its incredible.

[Laughriot]

I'm sorry?

COD realistic? are you motherfucking kidding me? COD, battlefield, whatever, is just about so far from realism as Halo is.
Im an ex Danish Quick reaction force soldier, and i have never in my career experienced, or heard of anyone experience anything remotely like, what COD and the other games are showing.

I am truly saddened that some people catagorize COD etc. as "realistic shooters" when they are so god damn far from reality its incredible.

o you and the poster above you: /sigh, is it possible to edit the title of a post? I've never tried. I wasn't trying to say that CoD is an insanely realistic video game. I only meant that it was a video game where the style and gameplay were designed to give the feeling of realism. Instead of having a HUD, you have a gun barrel to aim down. Instead of having pewpew laser guns, you have real weapons from a specific time period. Instead of having to shoot your opponent (who happens to be an 8-foot alien killing machine with an energy sword) 10 times in the chest to drop him, your opponent drops with a bare handful of center mass shots, or one head shot.

Not half as saddened as I am that you can't be bothered to read the post right above your own.

[Panicked]

Yeah Realistic and consoles don't go together at all. Taking 30 seconds to turn around is completely awful, I don't how anyone can think skill is involved in that game. At least with Halo you don't expect it to try to be realistic.

[Penguin FTW]

Nothing like extreme hyperbole to try and make a point.

[Zeta333]

C.O.D. is far from a realistic shooter. Play one of the battlefield games and you'll see how badass games like that can become!

Im pretty sure BF is just as far from realistic as COD is. Last time i checked a tank can go over a metal barrel while in BF the tank glitchs out most of the time and gets stuck on the barrel.

And something important in Battlefield is teamwork and strategy to succeed the goals.

While bf can be nice that is so untrue, i cant tell you how many times iv seen or done myself where one person went into a entire enemy area took everyone out, blew shit up, laid mines or c4d vehicles and captured the outposts.

Yeah Realistic and consoles don't go together at all. Taking 30 seconds to turn around is completely awful, I don't how anyone can think skill is involved in that game. At least with Halo you don't expect it to try to be realistic.

I guess if your retarded and set the sensitivity to 1 it will take 30 seconds to turn, i personally max mine out with inverted every time i play a Console FPS and i can turn just as fast as a person with a mouse can turn.

[Laughriot]

Im pretty sure BF is just as far from realistic as COD is. Last time i checked a tank can go over a metal barrel while in BF the tank glitchs out most of the time and gets stuck on the barrel.



While bf can be nice that is so untrue, i cant tell you how many times iv seen or done myself where one person went into a entire enemy area took everyone out, blew shit up, laid mines or c4d vehicles and captured the outposts.




I guess if your retarded and set the sensitivity to 1 it will take 30 seconds to turn, i personally max mine out with inverted every time i play a Console FPS and i can turn just as fast as a person with a mouse can turn.

I never could stand having sensitivity at 10 on a console game. On PCs, the faster the better, but on consoles I like mine at about 6 without invert. 10 is just too jumpy for moving with a thumbstick, imo.

More power to you if you can do it, though. It's a pretty nifty bit of dexterity.

[Toccs]

Just a bit of information and my opinion of course, the most realistic shooters I’ve played are Arma2 & Americas Army http://www.americasarmy.com/, you even get weapon jams in that game which is great! (I also served but it was 5 years ago, currently rejoining because i miss it)

Like i said before i think the skill is relative to the game you’re playing, you can't say the top players in Halo or CS have more skill then the top players in COD or BF it really doesn’t work like that.

Toccs

[xenaros]

I like them because they are realistic and more balanced than halo for the average gamer. On CoD you need to make sure you have cover or you are very vulnerable, you need to dash and duck around so you are only exposed when you need to be to make your shots. This style of play lowers the skill gap between amateurs and skilled players because it's not about 5 shots in the chest to kill, it's more like hide and seek, I see you, you dead, leave yourself open, you dead.

I really dislike Halo because it takes so long to kill someone, I don't want to duel someone across the map taking down each other's shields just to have a hog run me down. I guess it is more fun in an actual team (not random teams) but I am not into this game at all.#

Playing CoD is exciting and fast paced, playing Halo is like watching wrestling though, bang bang bang bang bang bang reload, cmon die already, bang bang bang, vroooom squish! Yeah, boooring. PS I am not a CoD fanboy, I enjoy MW1 and MW2 a little, Black Ops is bad though.

[Balbo]

Because i get tired of pretending to be rambo chasing after red dots and throwing knives at them while they endlessly sprint with the M60.

To add to Toccs, Operation Flashpoint is pretty similar to Arma and its very good

[Shinobi]

i usually just play battlefield bad company 2 because I'm Bored...

[Deleted]

Serious sam... Though it's not realistic in any way but it's still very very fun.

[Deleted]

I haven't played a shooter since (the first?) Counter-Strike, but if I had to play one I'd probably go for the most realistic.. Just seems like it would be more fun

[Laughriot]

I like them because they are realistic and more balanced than halo for the average gamer. On CoD you need to make sure you have cover or you are very vulnerable, you need to dash and duck around so you are only exposed when you need to be to make your shots. This style of play lowers the skill gap between amateurs and skilled players because it's not about 5 shots in the chest to kill, it's more like hide and seek, I see you, you dead, leave yourself open, you dead.

I really dislike Halo because it takes so long to kill someone, I don't want to duel someone across the map taking down each other's shields just to have a hog run me down. I guess it is more fun in an actual team (not random teams) but I am not into this game at all.#

Playing CoD is exciting and fast paced, playing Halo is like watching wrestling though, bang bang bang bang bang bang reload, cmon die already, bang bang bang, vroooom squish! Yeah, boooring. PS I am not a CoD fanboy, I enjoy MW1 and MW2 a little, Black Ops is bad though.

I think those underlined parts are some pretty accurate observations, and I think it really puts the spotlight on the difference in personal preference involved with choosing one of these game styles over the other. The two underlined parts are actually a very good summary of why I prefer Halo to the CoDs, whereas they are a good summary of why you prefer CoD to Halo.

If you'd like to hear something ironic, btw... I'm actually pretty close to the opposite of that opinion with regards to WoW. I enjoy XP-off twink matches more than 85 matches because I like seeing the high kill numbers and watching people constantly explode and have to run back into the action, as opposed to 85 where most deaths in BGs are the result of a gank, and it takes 10 minutes to kill someone. I think they're more balanced for what you called the "average" gamer than 85 PvP. Do they take more skill? Eh, I dunno. But they sure are more fun, in my opinion.

I just can't help feeling that FPS games shouldn't play like that, though.